Journal of Baltic Studies

This article was downloaded by:[EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution] On: 7 April 2008 Access Details: [subscription number 768320842] Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Baltic Studies Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t759156371

The language situation in Estonia Anna Verschik a a Tallinn University, Estonia

Online Publication Date: 01 September 2005 To cite this Article: Verschik, Anna (2005) 'The language situation in Estonia', Journal of Baltic Studies, 36:3, 283 - 316 To link to this article: DOI: 10.1080/01629770500000111 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01629770500000111

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Downloaded By: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution] At: 11:42 7 April 2008

The Language Situation in Estonia

Anna Verschik, Tallinn University, Estonia

Abstract. This article first offers a brief social history of the Estonian language

from the early nineteenth century to the present, before concentrating on the present day language situation. The latter is discussed with a focus on the nature of emerging language contacts, on aspects of linguistic creativity, on identity construction as well as on language at the state level (language legislation and integration).

round 1.1 million people speak Estonian as their mother tongue, the majority of whom (930,000) live in Estonia. According to the latest census (2000), the largest ethnic groups in Estonia (Estonians and Russians) constitute 67.9 and 25.6 percent of the total population respectively. The main purpose of this article is to review the language situation in contemporary Estonia. Attention is also given to sociocultural developments and changes in the language situation from the period of national awakening to 1991, but this is only brief, since a detailed sociolinguistic history of Estonia can already be found in Hennoste, Keevalik and Pajusalu (1999). The current situation will be discussed with reference to: emerging language contacts and language in society (including autochtonous vs. immigrant language communities and the impact of speakers' attitudes on the character of contact-induced change); linguistic creativity and identity construction; and language at the state level (language legislation, management of linguistic diversity, and integration).

A

From National Awakening to 1991

The Estonian language underwent a period of radical change during the nineteenth century, for a number of reasons. Firstly, the emergence of an Estonian proto-elite meant that language research became a matter for Estonians rather than for Germans and Swedes. Secondly, the realisation that Finnish and Estonian are closely related triggered a departure from German models of grammatical description and spelling. The first Estonian JBS, VOL XXXVI, No 3 (FALL2005)

283


284

ANNAVERSCHIK

grammar that closely followed the Finnish model was authored by Eduard Ahrens and appeared in 1843. However, the proposed spelling only became generally accepted from 1872, when the Society of Estonian Literati (Eesti Kirjameeste Selts, 1872-1893) began to institutionalise language planning. In the course of the sixteenth to eighteenth century, two different standards had evolved, based on the north and south Estonian dialects respectively. However, with the publication of a complete Bible translation into north Estonian in 1739, the relevance of the south Estonian written language started to decline. It ultimately faded into obsolescence during the nineteenth century, when the consolidation of the future modem Estonian nation and the unified standard language occurred on the basis of north Estonian. The awakening period of the late 1800s was marked by the rapid development of Estonian literature and a national press. The Estonian grammar written by Karl August Herman (1884, second part in 1896) was the first such work actually written in the language, and became a foundation for Estonian linguistic terminology. According to Hennoste et al (1999, 8), two groups of registers started to evolve: those of literature, periodicals, popular science, Estonian language and folklore research, which appeared relatively early; and those of public administration, state bureaucracy, military and natural sciences. The latter developed later, since the domains in question were traditionally handled in German and, from the mid-1880s, in Russian. The Russification period saw the imposition of administrative and cultural reforms designed to diminish the autonomy of the Baltic provinces and bring them closer to the rest of the Empire. However, the Baltic German elite could never accept a new order that would have undermined their positions as Herrenvolk, whilst urbanisation, modemisation and national awakening had already ensured that Russification -- never in any case a systematic policy -- held no appeal as far as educated Estonians were concerned. (Raun 2001, 66-80). The political climate of Russification nevertheless made it difficult to carry out scholarly research on Estonian language, literature and folklore. With only one lectureship in Estonian available at the University of Tartu, future Estonian language planners, linguists and humanitarian intelligentsia chose to pursue their studies at the University of Helsinki. The Finnish language thus became a source for lexical, derivational and morphological innovation in the process of Estonian language planning, and scholarly and cultural contacts flourished between the two countries during the subsequent period of independence (Erelt 2003b).


THE LANGUAGESITUATION1N ESTONIA 285

Estonian was still underdeveloped in several domains at the start of the twentieth century. On the back of the Young Estonia (Noor Eesti) movement, the Estonian Literary Society (Eesti Kirjanduse Selts, 19071940) was founded in order to promote studies in the humanities and to resolve problems of language planning. The most significant figures in the area of Estonian corpus planning were Johannes Aavik (1880-1973) and Johannes Voldemar Veski (1873-1968).1 Aavik was an innovator, famous for his radical ideas and subjective aesthetic criteria in lexicon enrichment and morphology planning. He proposed some forty neologisms ex nihilo and a great number of loan translations from other languages, mainly modelled on Finnish (R. Raag 1999). His goal was the deGermanisation of Estonian, particularly concerning its syntax. Apart from his work on Estonian lexicon enrichment, Aavik proposed several innovations in morphology (V. Raag 1998; R. Raag 1999). Veski served as a counterbalancing force, preferring Estonian dialects as a source of lexical innovation. He was one of the opponents of Aavik's language reform, though unlike some (e.g. Kaarel Leetberg) he was not opposed to deliberate interference in the evolution of language as such. The difference between the two reformers Aavik and Veski lay in their vision of modem standard Estonian and the means by which to cultivate it (see R. Raag 1999 and references therein). During the first independence period (1918-1940), Estonian achieved official status, whilst the languages of the former elites (Russian and German) lost their dominant position and became equal in status to other minority languages. Ethnically speaking, Estonia was a relatively homogenous country, with its minority communities amounting to roughly 10 percent of the overall population. The Manifesto to the Peoples of Estonia (Manifest Eestimaa Rahvastele) of 24 February 1918 proclaimed the right to cultural autonomy for Germans, Russians, Swedes and Jews (Mtifiripeal and Neljas 1999, 270); native-language education for both Estonians and non-Estonians was implemented in the same year, and the right to education in one's mother tongue was later enshrined in the 1920 Constitution. This was followed in 1925 by the Act on Cultural SelfGovernment Bodies for Ethnic Minorities (usually termed the Law on Cultural Autonomy), which was implemented by the German (1925) and Jewish minorities (1926). Other groups (Russians, Swedes, Latvians) lived more compactly, and were able to realise minority rights through local selfgovernment (M0firipeal and Neljas 1999, 271). In 1919 Estonian officially became a language of instruction at the University of Tartu. In the following year, the Academic Mother Tongue Society (Akadeemiline Emakeele Selts) was created in order to facilitate


286

ANNAVERSCHIK

systematic research into Estonian dialects and to elaborate upon principles of language planning (Erelt 2003b, 382). Unlike in Lithuania and Latvia, where one scholar in each country was clearly a leading figure in linguistics research (Jonas Jablonskis in Lithuania and J~nis EndzelTns in Latvia), Estonia had several prominent scholars of equal status: Andrus Saareste, professor of Estonian at Tartu (1925-1941), elaborated the classification of Estonian dialects and introduced modem methodology in the field of dialect geography (Saareste 1938; 1941); Julius M/igiste studied old written Estonian (Erelt and Laanekask 2003); Paul Ariste (1905-1990), a prolific Estonian linguist and polyglot, introduced modem phonology and investigated various lexical loans in Estonian (Ariste 1933; 1939); and Valter Tauli (1907-1986) became a world-famous theoretician of language planning (see Hennoste, 1999b, 145-58), summarising the experience of the Estonian language reform (Tauli 1938), and later publishing a seminal work in English on language planning theory (Tauli 1968). Since a substantial part of the population spoke regional dialects as their first language, the main efforts of language planners were directed at the imposition of standard Estonian as the single variety to be used by everybody (R. Raag 1999). The public was educated in the new standard through a series of dictionaries and school grammars (see references in R. Raag 1999 and Erelt 2003b). Raimo Raag (1999, 38) stresses the highly planned nature of standard Estonian in the first period of independence, and the fact that Estonians were expected to master the standard variety, even when approved norms were not in accordance with actual language use. This "autocracy of the written standard" (Hennoste et al. 1999, 9) persisted after Soviet occupation: in 1961, Estonian language planners created a Republican Committee for Correct Language Usage (Vabariiklik &igekeelsuse komisjon), which counteracted the direct importation of lexical items from Russian (Raun 1985, 24; Raag 1999, 33) and led to the publication of a large number of terminological dictionaries.2 However, status and acquisition planning was no longer in the hands of Estonians. The large-scale population losses sustained as a result of the Nazi and early Soviet occupations, coupled with mass settlement by Russianspeakers, brought a dramatic change in ethnic composition. By 1989, the proportion of Estonians within the total population had fallen to 61.5 percent overall, while in the north-east, Estonians had become a minority. 3 Estonian gave way to Russian in the functional domains of public administration, banking, militia, railway, navy and aviation. A network of Russian-language schools was created after the war, in which little or no Estonian was taught after the 1950s. The Estonian-language education system (from kindergartens to higher education) nevertheless continued to


THE LANGUAGESITUATION IN ESTONIA 287

function (although study of Russian was compulsory) and the prestige of Estonian remained high among its speakers.

Emerging Language Contacts since 1991 The inter-relationship between Estonian and Russian neatly illustrates how sociolinguistic and attitudinal factors can overweigh structural characteristics as far as language contacts are concerned.4 Russian has been in contact with Estonian and some minor Finnic languages on the northern and western shores of Lake Peipus over a long period of time. The first settlement by Russians on the territory of today's Estonia dates back to the sixteenth century. Russian Old Believers followed during the seventeenth to eighteenth centuries. The language behavior of Old Believers is still characterised by extensive Russian-Estonian bilingualism, even after the years of Soviet occupation.5 It seems probable that, over time, processes of sociopolitical change brought about successive language shifts (from Russian to Estonian and back again) amongst a section of the population and led to the emergence of a group of bilingual speakers. The multiple contact situation in the region has resulted in substantial lexical borrowing from, and morphosyntactic convergence towards Estonian (Heiter 1970), and frequent code-switching has become an integral part of the linguistic repertoire. Language contacts between Estonians and more recent Russian settlers are wholly different. The Soviet era was characterised by communal separation and a certain degree of functional bilingualism on the part of Estonians. The question of Russian influence on Estonian (see for instance Hint 1990) has been explained in terms of a multiple Causation model (Hasselblatt 2000), but Ehala (1994) has shown that the suggestion of a strong Russian influence on changes in adpositional use in contemporary Estonian is an oversimplification. The Sovietspeak that emerged through translation from Russian into Estonian that was used in the media did not last. Certain lexical borrowings that became part of colloquial Estonian have now become outdated and younger people do not use them any more. Apart from a few lexical borrowings (e.g. kohvik 'cafeteria', kaubamaja 'department store') the impact of Estonian on Russian during the Soviet era is negligible. This is partly explained by the fact that Russians at that time seldom chose to learn Estonian and that the two communities led separate lives. The contrast with the situation of indigenous/autochtonous Russians on the western and northern coast of Lake Peipus, however, demonstrates how the sociolinguistic situation and speakers' attitudes influence both the process and outcome of language contacts.


288

ANNAVERSCHIK

The current contact situation between Russian and Estonian is developing in a sociocultural and sociolinguistic setting quite different from the pre-1991 period. Since Estonian has become the official language of the state, more and more (young) Russians are learning and using it. It is still hard to predict what effect on Estonian (if any) the massive acquisition of Estonian as a second language (L2) might have (Ehala 2000). The impact will depend on the motivation of the learners, on conditions and the degree by which Estonian is acquired as a second language, and on speakers' attitudes. The language-planning climate has also undergone considerable changes. Estonian society has moved away from what Hennoste (1999a) calls the "totalitarian language model" (i.e. a very strictly defined standard with a rigid editing of texts) towards a more flexible position. Since text production tends to be decentralised in a democratic society, it cannot be fully regulated and controlled. This tendency can also be observed in Russia proper and in the use of the Russian language in Estonia. To use the terminology of Le Page and Tabouret-Keller (1985), both communities are becoming more diffused. Although a proportion of Russian-speakers prefer newspapers and TV from Russia to the Russian-language media of Estonia (Vihalemm 1999), there is still a need (and a market) for local information in the Russian language. However, this kind of text (laws, banking and trading information, advertising etc.) is based on Estonian originals (translated, adapted, digested) and is therefore of a secondary nature (Verschik 2004c). Such Russian texts are clearly open to innovations and changes that in the long run might lead to the emergence of a local variety (or varieties) of Russian. A number of sociologists and political scientists -- both Estonian and Westem -- have argued that Estonia's Russian community is the most heterogeneous of all the post-Soviet Russian diaspora groups, and that it stands to become more fragmented as time goes on. 6 Yet social scientists are significantly ahead of linguists as far as research on the differentiation of Russian speakers is concerned. As regards regional differences, l~l. Rannut (2002; 2003) has demonstrated the correlation between language environment and attitudes on the one hand and the degree of success in the acquisition of Estonian as a second language (L2) on the other. Tallinn (53.7 percent Estonian, 36.5 percent Russian by population) has become the place where the most interesting strategies of multilingual communication (including code-switching and various types of linguistic creativity) can be observed.



There is no research on generational differentiation, but from what we know about sociocultural history and language policy in Estonia, it would be reasonable to anticipate an observable impact. Moreover, since Russian is no longer a compulsory subject at school, there are now young Estonians with no knowledge of Russian (this is especially visible in areas with an Estonian majority), and this factor may cause changes in everyday communication patterns. At least some younger Russians are developing a new identity (not to be confused with that of the autochtonous Russians), and can be termed Estonian Russians (~stonskije russko'e in Russian, eestivenelased/Eesti venelased in Estonian). This new identity group should not be treated as a merely sociopolitical construct, since its development is manifested in language behavior, language use and deliberate changes (see below)] Post-Soviet Russian-Estonian language contacts, though, can still be considered a new, emerging phenomenon. Another such emerging area is that of Estonian-Finnish language contacts. Again, this topic should be treated with caution: the Soviet-era impact of Finnish (mainly from the Finnish TV that was visible in Tallinn and its surrounding areas) is not to be confused with the current situation that has arisen due to the large numbers of Finnish tourists visiting Tallinn and the emergence of an entire service industry near the port area catering for a Finnish clientele. Only a few researchers have written on these postindependence contacts, s and no fieldwork has yet been carried out on Estonian-Finnish interaction in the port area and the markets. In these settings, Estonian-speaking salespersons try to communicate in Finnish with their customers, even though they often lack any formal training in the language. The closeness of the two languages means that various strategies of accommodation/compromise are likely to be employed, along with a continuum of varieties between Estonian and Finnish. At one end of this continuum are varieties that approximate relatively closely to Finnish; at the other there is something that might be labelled quasi-Finnish, where the Estonian salespersons are aware of the fact that what they are speaking is not Finnish but a compromise variety. 9 The situation with Finnish, however, may not be as clear-cut as the one with Russian (i.e. a clear division between the Soviet and post-Soviet era in the degree and nature of the contacts). The presence of this Finnish idiom in Tallinn dates back to the fourteenth century and has continued thereafter (albeit on a small scale), though there is little research on pre-independence Estonian-Finnish contacts. I° The case of the Ingrian Finns, meanwhile, must be treated separately from the above mentioned Estonian-Finnish language contacts. Most settlement by Ingrian Finns in Estonia took place during and after World War II. Those involved have adopted either


290

ANNAVERSCHIK

Estonian or Russian depending on the surrounding language environment, while Finnish (or the Ingrian Finnish dialect) survived mostly as a homelanguage of the older generation. The restoration of independence and resumption of broad contacts with Finland, however, may reverse this language shift to some extent, it Russian-Finnish language contacts in the capital can certainly be termed as emerging contacts. Like the Estonian-Finnish contacts referred to above, they take place in those shopping and market areas that have a concentration of Finnish customers. So far no sociolinguistic analysis has been produced on this aspect. Interestingly, some Russian salespersons do have a certain command of Finnish but not of Estonian. As all young Russian salespersons are most likely to have been born and educated in Estonia, this fact says something about the "market value" of Estonian: such speakers do not think that their knowledge of this language is economically relevant. Vihalemm (2002b, 206-7) has found that the instrumental value of Estonian remains ambivalent, which explains why interactions between Estonians and their Russian conversation partners tend to take place mainly in Russian. However, the second part of this claim is disputable, because microsociolinguistic evidence shows more subtle patterns of communication with some considerable compromise (cf. Estonian-Finnish communication -- see below). Finally, it has to be added that in certain localities such as the Rotermanni Keskus in Tallinn, Estonian and Russianspeaking salespersons constantly interact with each other as well as with Finnish clients. This is an extremely interesting situation of triple EstonianFinnish-Russian contacts that is still awaiting investigation. The topic of "the dangers" of English as a global language and its "harmful" influence on Estonian and t h e language attitudes of young people remains emotionally loaded. However, with the exception of Ehala and Niglas (forthcoming) and some studies on lexical borrowing from English to Estonian (Leemets 2002; Liiv 2003), neither macro- nor microsociolinguistic research on this theme has been carried out so far. As the "English-speaking population" (an analogue to the term "Russianspeaking" population) is hardly visible in Estonia, it might be assumed that face-to-face interactions in an everyday setting are scarce. Contacts with English are mostly contacts with English-language popular culture, Internet, media etc., rather than with actual speakers of different varieties of English. Another area is the use of English for academic purposes. On a purely empirical basis, it appears that more lexical borrowings from English have entered Russian than Estonian during the past decade. When it comes to analysing actual language use, some scholars ~2in contact



linguistics argue that "Estonian", "Russian", "English", etc. should not be viewed as clearly defined homogenous entities. Adherents to this school of thought propose a more differentiated approach that concentrates on varieties, text genres, situations etc., rather than on strictly defined standards. It would therefore be more appropriate to investigate the "'influence" o f English in such specific contexts. Further questions to consider are as follows: are we speaking about the borrowing o f non-basic vocabulary and certain discourse markers or about structural impact? If we suppose that a certain number o f Englishinfluenced discourses exist, do these discourses belong to the mainstream use of Estonian or are they merely confined to a limited use in microcommunities? Does English play a role as a linguafranca in Estonia? What particular varieties of English are we dealing with? Vihalemm (2002b, 207) demonstrates that English is not yet widely recognized as a lingua franca in Russian to Estonian communication, although it might provide a new option. Once again, however, the lack of any solid empirical evidence means that it is too early to assess the impact o f English. Dialects

Estonian dialects are traditionally subdivided into the following categories: (1) the north-eastern coastal dialect group that includes the northern coastal and north-eastern dialects; (2) the north Estonian dialect group that consists of the central, eastern, insular, and western dialects; (3) the south Estonian dialect group that is further subdivided into the Mulgi, Tartu, and Vfru dialects. Some researchers also refer to a separate Setu dialect within the Vfru area. The central dialect of the north Estonian dialect group has spread into other northern areas, while in the south a new common variety based on features shared by the dialects of the south Estonian dialect group has emerged. Recent studies on levelling in Mulgi, Vrru and the insular dialect have demonstrated that the position of Vrru -- the most distinctive of the Estonian dialects -- has remained the strongest, while the Mulgi variant, used in an area on the border of southern and northern dialects, has retreated most rapidly (Pajusalu 2003a, 262). A new Vrru-Setu standard was created in the mid-1990s as a compromise variety o f the two dialects, but it would be inaccurate to claim that the latter has been replaced by the standard language. In sum, therefore, attempts to level regional varieties and impose standard Estonian have not been successful (Pajusalu, Velsker and Org 1999). Recent research on accents has shown that even following a shift to the standard language regional accents remain as a marker of regional identity (Pajusalu 2003a, 267, Pajusalu 2003b, 110).


292

ANNAVERSCH1K

Investigations into spoken Estonian and Estonian slang started back in the 1980s. However, systematic research became possible only once attitudes towards varieties other than the standard started to change. Tilt Hennoste introduced methods and frameworks of spoken language research to Estonian sociolinguistics (Hennoste 2003, 237-43). He also designed principles for the creation of a corpus of spoken Estonian, and such work is now being carried out at the University of Tartu. Relevant publications on spoken Estonian include R/i/ibis (2000), while Keevallik (2003) has written on major characteristics of colloquial Estonian, focusing on distinctive features of lexicon, phonology, syntax, and communication pattems. Hennoste (2003, 237-62) has recently produced a detailed overview of the main topics and methodology in this field, together with an extensive bibliography. As mentioned previously, Estonian is spoken abroad by some 160,000 people, most notably in Siberia, the Caucasus, Sweden, Canada and the USA. The Estonian-speaking communities in these states/regions are predominantly bilingual. Initial research on these themes from the 1960s was produced within Estonia and was of a mostly descriptive nature.' 3 Outside Estonia, Oksaar's (1972) study of Estonians in the USA and in Sweden marked the start of a new trend towards investigation of bilingualism during the 1970s and 1980s. Most of the more recent studies of Estonian outside Estonia focus either on lexical and structural borrowing or on the dynamics of old regional dialects in a new environment. 14

Language in Society: Current Language Dynamics As we turn to the question of current language dynamics, it is important to note that the border between purely sociological and macrosociolinguistic research on language policy, linguistic preferences, attitudes, problems of integration and multilingual education is not always clear. As such, the exact remit of the references that are included in this review may vary. A second methodological issue concerns the imbalance between macrosociolinguistic (large scale quantitative) research on the language situation in the Baltic region and microsociolinguistic investigations (qualitative studies of microcollectives, actual language behavior, communicative practices etc.). Where a bibliography of studies belonging to the former category would be several dozens of pages long, the same certainly cannot be said of the latter. Spolsky (1998, 8-9) believes that a certain tension exists between the two schools of thought in contemporary sociolinguistics. The issue here, however, is not the effectiveness of the methods as such but rather the


THE LANGUAGESITUATIONIN ESTONIA 293

prevalence of one type of approach over the other. For instance, how should one treat the claim (based on self-reported data) that Russians with a level of proficiency in Estonian avoid code-switching (Vihalemm, manuscript.) without any empirical evidence of their actual linguistic behavior? In this particular instance it may be argued that such a statement lacks universal validity, since many counter-examples can be found in everyday communication.15 Purely descriptive linguistic research represents the other extreme. Many studies of indigenous Russians' language use (Mtirkhein 1970; Burdakova 1997; Burdakova and Burdakova 2000; Heiter 1970) and the Russian used in contemporary Estonia (Ktilmoja 2000; 2001; Kostandi 1996; 2000; 2004) belong to this type of work. The above-mentioned studies are not rooted in any contemporary contact linguistics or sociolinguistic framework, and thus lack any discussion of phenomena such as code-switching, code-mixing, convergence, and code-copying (Verschik 2004c).

Minority Language Communities (Autochtonous/lmmigrant) Many scholars acknowledge that there is no single clear definition of the term "minority," which is understood and used differently according to national context. (Extra 2004). The sociolinguistic situation in the Baltic countries, and the situation of Russian-speakers in particular, cannot be compared to that of any west European country, and is more akin to a colonial (or post-colonial) setting. 16 Today's "Russian-speaking population" consists for the most part of Soviet-era settlers and their descendants, who were given various incentives (better housing, jobs etc.) by the central authorities, and who considered Estonia to be part of a single country -- the USSR. Lack of clarity notwithstanding, the European Union in 1993 established five criteria for the definition of a "national minority": (1) citizenship; (2) long-standing and stable relations with the country; (3) a clearly discernible ethnic, cultural, religious and/or linguistic character; (4) self-identification and a commonly recognised motivation to preserve their ethnic identity; (5) a sufficiently representative number, however smaller than the rest of the country's population. 17This definition has been used to frame Estonian minorities policy, which draws a clear distinction between autochtonous/indigenous "national" minorities on the one hand, and "new" or "immigrant" ethnic minorities on the other (Smith 2001, 2003). With the exception of the Russian Old Believers, Estonia's five main "indigenous" minorities all but disappeared as a result of Nazi and Soviet occupation.18 Their rights were nevertheless restored after 1991, not least


294

ANNAVERSCHIK

through the reinstatement of the Law on Cultural Autonomy. 19 Also relevant in this context are the V6ro and Seto (V6ru and Setu in Standard Estonian), both of which have recently achieved recognition as autochtonous ethnic communities.2° Both groups have preserved their distinct dialects, yet the Setu have a more clearly distinctive folk culture and religion (Russian Orthodox), and are more prone to identify themselves as distinct from Estonians. 2~ Not all members of what are commonly termed "indigenous" minorities, however, have roots in the respective pre-war ethnic community. In the case of the Jewish population, for instance, the majority are actually newcomers from the Soviet period. 22 The indigenous and nonindigenous members of this ethnic group exhibit different sociolinguistic characteristics and construct their identity differently, a pattern which is also discernible in the behavior of Jews in the other Baltic countries (see Verschik 2000 and further discussion below). As there are no corresponding studies of Estonia's other ethnic groups, the wider sociolinguistic relevance of this internal division it is not yet clear. There are a total of 142 different ethnic groups living in today, s Estonia. Compared to the two main language communities (Estonian and Russian), however, the so-called "third ethnicities" do not play a significant role in the demographic and sociocultural make-up of the country. Representatives of non-Russian nationalities who settled i n Estonia during the Soviet period had for the most part already acquired some knowledge of Russian, and showed little or no interest in learning Estonian. This fact, combined with an education system offering a choice of Russian or Estonian-medium schools, contributed to the further Russification of these ethnicities. By contrast, the current state policy allows these ethnicities to openly identify themselves as such, and to promote their languages and cultures, factors which have served further to undermine any notion of a homogeneous "Russian-speaking" identity (Smith 2001, 2003).

Speakers' Attitudes, Linguistic Preference and Self-identification Sociolinguistic factors in general, and speakers' attitudes in particular, play a major role in the outcome of language contacts. Change by deliberate decision has recently been identified and acknowledged as a mechanism of contact-induced language change (Thomason 1997; 2001). If each utterance may be interpreted as an act of identity (Le Page and Tabouret-Keller 1985), then every speaker is able to construct not one, but several identities for different purposes. An identity can be constructed



(displayed, disguised etc.) both for the immediate purposes of a particular conversation or situation, and with long-term intentions, such as general identification with a speech community or a culture. In this light, it becomes clear how self-reported data in censuses might reflect identity construction. According to the Soviet census of 1979, fluency in Russian increased among the Soviet nationalities in general but decreased in Estonia from 28.3 percent in 1970 to 24.1 percent in 1979. However, as Raun (2001, 210) observes, such a decline is not credible by any objective means and is to be interpreted as a form of resistance. In the Estonian census of 2000, 44 percent of Russian-speakers claimed to know Estonian (as opposed to only 15 percent in 1989). Vihalemm (2002a) has demonstrated that a considerable number of young Russian-speaking city dwellers have started to identify with Estonia on a civic level. Civic self-identification is a complex concept that includes, among other things, identification with the state, its laws, the values of the Estonian society, and a symbolic appreciation of the Estonian language. The latter, however, does not automatically mean a satisfactory command of Estonian. Some young Russians who belong to this group have indeed acquired at least a working command of Estonian, whereas some merely acknowledge the Estonian language as a symbol of the Estonian people and state without having learned the language to a minimally sufficient level. According to Vihalemm (1999; 2002a; 2002b), at least starting a conversation in Estonian is an expression of symbolic politeness. The census data also show that a high level of language loyalty is characteristic of both Estonians and Russians (97.9 percent and 98.2 percent respectively), while knowledge of the national languages (both as a first and as a second language) of other ethnic groups (Finns excepted) is steadily decreasing. One should, however, treat these data with a degree of caution, first because they are based on self-reports, and second because the census questionnaire excluded the possibility of declaring multiple identities/several mother tongues (Verschik 2005). What is needed from a methodological point of view is to gather microsociolinguistic evidence and juxtapose this with the findings of sociologists and macrosociolinguists. For instance, analysis of multilingual conversations in the market place and in bilingual/Russian-language TV programs has shown that starting a conversation in Estonian is just one strategy among many (e.g. insertional or altemational code-switching, use of compromise forms that do not belong to either monolingual grammar). In the same vein, the fragmentation and heterogeneity of Russian-speakers that is claimed and acknowledged by many researchers needs to be supported by a scrupulous analysis of data on linguistic behavior. Future


296

ANNAVERSCH|K

research ought to seek answers to the following questions: What is the range of varieties used by speakers who wish to construct a new identity (i.e. Estonian Russians)? How do these varieties differ across different groups of Russian-speakers? Are these varieties just a transitional phenomenon or are at least some of them likely to become crystallised? A series of qualitative studies by 1311e Rannut (2002; 2003) illustrates how success in the acquisition of Estonian by Russian-speaking schoolchildren is dependent on a combination of two factors: the attitudes and motivation of the parents, and an adequate Estonian-language environment. Her interviews with children and their parents reveal their actual (rather than self-reported) command of Estonian. The best results in the acquisition of Estonian are achieved in those cases where families value the Estonian language and are not afraid of the difficulties a Russianspeaking child may potentially encounter in an Estonian-medium or immersion school.23 While politicians, scholars, teachers and parents discuss the possible negative effects of such schooling or, on the contrary, the desirability of a prospective reform of Russian-medium schools, some Russian-speaking parents are not waiting on the results of these discussions, and are expressing their attitude by sending their children to schools with Estonian as a language of instruction. In the words of Raud (2004, 265; 267), they are voluntarily Estonianising their children. A statistical analysis of the state of Russian-medium schools shows that, even without reform or interference on the part of the authorities, the number of pupils in these schools is steadily declining. According to Mart Rannut (2004, 13), there are now less than 40,000 pupils in Russian-medium schools and this number decreases every year by 4-5 percent. This fact can be explained both by a low birth rate and by the parents' desire to place their children in Estonian-medium pre-school educational establishments and schools. Attitudes and linguistic preferences among so-called third ethnicities have yet to be studied. It is well known that Soviet language policy contributed to the Russification of these ethnicities, with the possible exception of Finns, Roma, indigenous Tatars and Jews. Although only slightly over 2 percent of Estonia's population speaks the remaining 107 languages (i.e. not Estonian and Russian) as their mother tongue, the attitudes and self-identification of this section of the population merit separate research.



Internally Conflicted Communities As mentioned previously, some minorities that are considered to be autochtonous because of their long-standing presence in the country are, in fact, heterogeneous as far as the origin of their representatives is concerned. Estonia's Jews constitute a textbook example of such an internally conflicted community. It is impossible to provide a simple answer to the question "who is a Jew", since in the contemporary world a whole range of contradicting definitions exist that are based on (ethno-) religious and secular (ethnic, linguistic, political, cultural, geographical) criteria. For instance, it is not clear what the "national" language of Jews is. In Estonia, Jews have always been considered to be an ethnic minority rather than a religious community. The Estonian Jewry of the interwar period had sociocultural characteristics that distinguished it from Jews in other European countries. It was a very small, highly urbanised and secularised (but not linguistically assimilated) bourgeois community (0.4 percent). These parameters also dictated the linguistic profile of the community: Yiddish monolingualism would have been impossible. Competing secularist national movements such as Zionism and Yiddishism of various types became popular in Estonia, as was the case elsewhere in Eastern and Central Europe. The choice of the language of instruction for Jewish schools (i.e. Yiddish and Hebrew, or a non-Jewish language) has posed a problem in many countries, and Estonia is no exception. These matters had become complicated even before the Act on Cultural Self-Government Bodies for Ethnic Minorities was passed by the parliament. Jewish cultural autonomy (implemented in 1926) enabled the development of cultural and social life and the promotion of modern education in both Yiddish and Hebrew, but this did not settle the argument. Although there were bitter disputes between Hebraists and Yiddishists over the future direction of Jewish development, in reality all Estonian Jews spoke and/or understood Yiddish; despite the best efforts of Zionists, nobody used Hebrew as a language of everyday communication. Practically all the Jews also knew Estonian, while some were also proficient in German and/or Russian. School statistics from 1934-35 show a marked contrast from those of 1923-1924: by the mid-thirties, the number of students in Jewish (Yiddish and Hebrew) schools and Estonian-medium schools had significantly increased, at the expense of Russian- and German-medium schools (Verschik 1999). The sociocultural profile of those Jews who came to Estonia after World War Two was completely different. For reasons beyond the scope of this article, the Jews of the Soviet Union had already undergone or were


298

ANNAVERSCHIK

undergoing a language shift from Yiddish to Russian; at the time of their arrival in Estonia, most newcomers were Russian monolinguals (which, however, does not exclude their self-identification as Jews). Contrary to expectations, the system of Yiddish-language schools in the Soviet Union was not restored during the so-called thaw period, and the few all-Union publications (a couple of newspapers, a monthly periodical, some re-prints of the classics) in the Yiddish language were not easily obtainable. Besides, many Yiddish-speakers were opposed on ideological grounds to the Soviet system of Yiddish spelling, and did not wish to read such publications. Jewish parents thus had to choose between Estonian and Russian-medium schools. Many Jews who had their roots in the pre-war community found themselves in a situation where they had more in common with Estonians (history, language, certain traditions) than with newcomers who, technically speaking, formed part of what was vaguely termed the Russianspeaking population. According to the recent census, only 124 out of 2,145 Jews speak Yiddish as their first language; Of these, 107 are Estonian citizens, a fact which suggests that Yiddish has been preserved mainly among the indigenous Jewish community. The latter group clearly identify with Estonia and have a native or near-native command of Estonian. While there is no real element of "conflict", what outsiders perceive as a single ethnocultural community is in fact divided more or less along linguistic lines, and thereby mirrors the divisions within Estonia's society as a whole (Verschik 1999; 2000). 24

Creativity, Negotiation and Identity Construction In recent times, several scholars in the field of language contacts have emphasised the importance of linguistic creativity (Auer 1998; Hinnenkamp 2003; Thomason 1997). In the present contact situation in Estonia, where language communities are becoming more diffused, there is a need for self-redefinition on the part of communities and individual speakers. Creativity is closely linked to negotiation and change by deliberate decision. In Thomason's terms, negotiation is a basis for every communicative act, and it becomes even more important in a multilingual setting. Hennoste and Vihalemm (1999) have outlined some aspects of communication in Estonian as a second language. However, this study does not focus on code-switching and other compromise strategies. It is relevant that both Russian to Estonian and Russian to Russian communication demonstrates linguistic creativity and deliberate changes. Examples may be best observed in an informal setting. Starting a conversation in Estonian is



but one possible strategy. Various types of code-switching can be successfully employed for the same pragmatic purposes (i.e. to mark one's politeness or to express a wish for cooperation), even by speakers that are not very proficient in Estonian. Salespersons with a relatively low proficiency in Estonian seem to be developing a discourse in which certain Estonian nouns, numerals, discourse markers and some adjectives are inserted into their Russian utterances, with no inflectional morphology for nouns and adjectives of either Russian or Estonian. Apart from code-switching in the usual sense, there exists another pattern of Russian to Estonian communication that is available to speakers with a sufficient command of the both languages. A dominant speaker of A speaks B while the dominant speaker of B speaks A. It is a symbolic exchange of languages and may be labelled as "paradoxical politeness" (Versehik 2004a). Oprus (2004) has registered this pattern among speakers who are acquainted with one other. Another instance of linguistic creativity used in Russian to Russian communication is jocular relexification, where Estonian stems are inserted into the Russian grammatical matrix. The purpose of such a discourse -which requires at least some degree of competence in Estonian -- is clearly ironic. It is not yet clear whether this kind of mixed speech will become crystallised or, in terms of Auer (1999) turn into a fused variety, and spread into Russian monolingual use. As the number of Russian-speakers with a command of Estonian increases, the evolution of convergent forms (Clyne 1997) is to be expected. In addition, even a passive knowledge of a variety may lead to language interference. Therefore, convergent forms may at some point enter the speech of monolinguals. To a certain extent, this has already occurred in the case of Russian equivalents to Estonian compound nouns (Verschik 2004b). It has emerged that some of these equivalents are either unintelligible for monolingual Russian-speakers from Russia or dismissed as strange or ungrammatical. Finally, all of these methods may be used consciously as a means of identity construction. Some young Russian-speakers with a relatively high proficiency in Estonian (students of Tallinn University) have claimed that they are perfectly aware of the fact that certain convergent forms they use (for instance, the application of Estonian morphosyntactic rules to some Russian verbs) are considered ungrammatical in Standard Russian. Nevertheless, they explain their language use by arguing that "this is Estonia, not Russia".


300

ANNAVERSCHIK

Language at the Level of the State in the Baltics

Language Ideologies and Planning The language situation in the Baltic Republics can be described most adequately in terms of post-imperialism (Ozolins 2002), a fact which is still far from universally acknowledged in the literature. In his excellent review of existing work on Baltic language policies, Ozolins (1999; 2002; 2003) asserts that a minority rights-based approach to Baltic language and citizenship legislation is often counter-productive, because international human rights norms have been designed for situations completely different from that of the Baltic countries. Jacques Maurais (1997, 140) for his part strongly supports Estonia's current language policy, arguing that the rapidly declining share of the titular nationality within the overall population during Soviet rule necessitated measures to prevent Estonians from becoming an "aboriginal minority". Ozolins (1999; 2003) further emphasizes that the undoing of the present language policy and the introduction of two official languages would cause conflict and create tensions in society, because this would mark a step towards the preservation and continuation of the previous imperialist regime and Russian monolingualism. In analysing the complexities of the post-imperial situation in the Baltic, Skutnabb-Kangas (1992, 178) has characterised the so-called "Russian-speaking population" as a former "majorised minority" -- a group which, although a minority in numerical terms, formerly occupied a position of considerable power and privilege. In this regard, opposition to current language policy can be seen as nothing more than a struggle to retain the privileged monolingualism that Russians enjoyed during the Soviet era. One of the key goals of the said language policy has been to restore balance, by ensuring that it is possible to communicate in and receive services in Estonian across the entire territory of Estonia. The first step towards achieving this end was the Language Law of 1989. This was passed by the Supreme Council of the Estonian SSR, and must be viewed firmly in the context of that time. Although the Law proclaimed Estonian the official language of the country, its main goal was to ensure EstonianRussian bilingualism amongst holders of certain occupations. Language requirements for employees in these areas were laid out in new guidelines, which established six categories of proficiency from A (basic listening comprehension of the 800 most common words and expressions) to F (full proficiency in the Estonian language).



Important as it was, the 1989 Law remained mainly symbolic and declarative (M. Rannut 2004, 6; Maurais 1997, 58); designed when Estonia was still a de facto part of the USSR, it contained references to the Soviet Constitution. The law stated that non-Estonians had the right to establish schools in their mother tongue and to promote their religious, press and cultural activities, but it did not define the term "minority" or specify how non-Estonian medium education was to be organised. It was thus plainly inappropriate to the new sociolinguistic and political situation that arose after 1991, and has therefore since been superseded by the constitution, the new Language Law of 1995 and a further 400 laws and lower legal and normative acts. 25 Following independence, the need for govemmental institutions to supervise the implementation and observance of language legislation also became apparent. This function is fulfilled by the Language Board and the Language Inspectorate (Keeleinspektsioon), which operate under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Education and Research. 26 Current status planning envisages Estonian as the sole official language of the country. The constitution provides for two language regimes: Estonian monolingualism throughout the entire territory of Estonia; and Estonian-minority language bilingualism, which can take one of two forms (territorial autonomy or non-territorial cultural autonomy). The territorial bilingual regime is applicable in localities where at least half of the permanent residents belong to a national minority. In that case, all residents are entitled to communicate with the state and the local government authorities in the language of the minority. In reality, however, the implementation of this bilingual regime remains theoretical: since the term "national minority" is deemed to apply only to autochtonous communities, the dominant Russian-speaking population of the north-east does not qualify a s s u c h . 27 Legislation catering for autochtonous minorities (less than 7 percent of the population) has had a modest impact thus far, with only the Finns having opted for a cultural autonomy. A number of positive developments can nonetheless be observed in the situation of autochtonous and nonautochtonous ethnic groups alike. Since 1993, representatives of both have sat on a permanent round table consultative body under the aegis of the Presidency. Over seventy different national and cultural associations had been registered by 2003, with the Estonian Union of Nationalities (Eestimaa Rahvuste Ohendus) acting as an umbrella organisation for over thirty cultural societies representing twenty-one different ethnic groups. 28 The activities of ethnic cultural societies receive support from the Education and Culture of Ethnic Minorities program of the Integration Foundation (see below). Within this framework, several groups run Sunday


302

ANNAVERSCHIK

schools that provide teaching in the respective language. Apart from Russian-medium schools, the only other minority secondary school is the Jewish school in Tallinn, which also teaches in Russian. Hebrew is taught as a subject, but sociocultural and historical considerations mean that Yiddish is absent from the curriculum. For those Russified third ethnicities now seeking to differentiate themselves from Russian-speakers of Russian origin, so-called language shelter programs would be most appropriate. This is a new project entailing numerous new challenges, not least the provision of qualified language teachers. Estonian corpus planning operates on principles of persuasion, recommendation and promotion rather than strict normalisation and prescription. It comprises the following activities: standard language planning, language for special purposes planning (systematisation of special terminology, creation of specialised dictionaries etc.), and name planning that is aimed at the protection and development of the Estonian onomastic heritage (M. Rannut 2004). Language technology planning for its part focuses upon enlarging the general corpora of standard Estonian and colloquial Estonian, the creation of new corpora, and the elaboration of a standard system of electronic dictionaries. Most widespread software products are already available in Estonian. In the field of acquisition planning, Estonian is taught as a second language from the first grade in non-Estonian-medium schools, and since 2000 also in kindergartens. In 1995, categories of Estonian language proficiency were aligned with the Council of Europe model. The A to F system was replaced by three levels: basic (former levels A-C); intermediate (former level D), and advanced (former levels E-F). The expected level of proficiency for citizenship applicants is A2 under the former system, and the language requirements of the application are fully covered within the Estonian language curriculum of Russian-medium primary schools. The Language Board has recently elaborated a Development Strategy of the Estonian Language (Eesti keele arendamise strateegia) 2004-2010. This aims to secure the protection, promotion, sustainability, development and full-scale use of standard Estonian as a state language in all domains across the entire country. It also outlines several tasks that are focused on regional and social varieties of Estonian, Estonian sign languages, specialised terminology, language technology, and foreign language teaching. 29 One novel feature of this program is "language marketing", designed to enhance language awareness, shape language attitudes, and promote the study of standard Estonian abroad.



Language and Integration There exists a solid body of literature on the integration of nonEstonians into Estonian society, albeit with diverse views amongst the scholars working on this issue. In this regard, Laitin's (1996) view that English is increasingly becoming a lingua franca between Estonia's two speech communities is contested by, among others, Ponarin (2000). However, the latter's claim that Estonians discourage Russians from switching into Estonian (Ponarin 2003, 153-58) is not confirmed by actual language practices. Survey work by Iris Pettai has found that the preservation of one's national identity is important for 50 percent of non-Estonians, while approximately 10 percent wish to assimilate and the rest are either indifferent or have not yet decided. Among those who opt for complete assimilation, young people under thirty prevail. 3° Vetik (1995, 148) emphasizes that a certain sociopsychological re-orientation, linked to considerations of economic welfare, is gradually taking place among Russian-speakers. In his sample, 72 percent believed that Russians in Estonia identify themselves with Estonia. 3~ . In recent years, the state has taken a number of steps to encourage this process, starting with the establishment of the Integration Foundation (Mitte-eestlaste Integratsiooni Sihtasutus) in 1998. The objectives of the Foundation are to launch and facilitate appropriately targeted projects, and to coordinate the efficient use of resources in the field of integration through the management and implementation of large scale projects on behalf of foreign donors. Through its Centre for Educational Programs, the Foundation has developed and implemented the state program Integration into Estonian Society 2000-2007, which provides an overall framework for its activities. 32 Foreign aid has indeed been an important component of this process. A four-phase project under the EU Phare programme has had the goal of ensuring that graduates of non-Estonian general secondary schools acquire the medium-level knowledge of Estonian necessary for further educational and career requirements, and that non-Estonian adults have a level of proficiency that is sufficient tbr everyday and occupational communication. The project supports language camps and family exchanges which allow children from Russian-speaking t'amilies -- mainly from the north-east -- to spend time in an Estonian-language environment. Phare also supports the Interest Project, targeted at adults. A language learner attends Estonian language training courses of his/her choice, and, if he or she passes the required language exam successfully and presents a certificate issued by the State Examination and Qualification Centre, 50


304

ANNAVERSCHIK

percent of the study fee is reimbursed. The project has supported more than 10,000 language learners to date. 33 The Integration Foundation also operates a National Language Immersion Program in cooperation with Canadian and Finnish partners. This seeks to promote additive bilingualism -- the successful acquisition of Estonian language and culture and the preservation of the student's home language. Both early and late immersion is practised in Estonia. There are nine immersion kindergartens (three of them in Tallinn, two in KohtlaJgrve, two in Narva, one in Sillam~ie and one in J6hvi) and seven early immersion schools (in Kohtla-Jgrve, Narva, Tallinn, Maardu, and Valga). Late immersion programs currently operate in four schools (in Tallinn, Narva, and Tapa). In spring 2004 it was decided that six more schools in various regions of Estonia were qualified to join the late immersion program in the near future. 34 The Estonian state guarantees non-Estonian-medium primary education, and operates a variety of educational models. These are: Russian-medium schools where Estonian is taught as a subject; a transitional model, where Russian children are given additional training in Estonian and later join Estonian-medium schools; total late immersion; bilingual schools where under fifty percent of subjects are taught in Estonian; partial early immersion; and total early immersion. There are also Russian children in monolingual Estonian-medium s c h o o l s . 35 However, many graduates of Russian-medium secondary schools still remain isolated from Estonian-speakers and face language-related problems in the job market and/or further education, where they are expected to use Estonian. This is partly a function of the insufficient Estonian-language environment in some areas of the country, but also due to a lack of qualified teachers of Estonian as a second language, especially in the north-east. Improving graduates' proficiency in Estonian is the main goal of the ongoing education reform. Following the Latvian example, this states that 60 percent of the state secondary school curriculum should be taught in Estonian with effect from 2 0 0 7 . 36 As already noted, some Russian-medium schools already use Estonian for teaching certain subjects in the form of a partial immersion. Mart Rannut (2004, 13) argues that the gradual transition to bilingual secondary education has been inadequately prepared: Russia opposes the plan on political grounds, and many teachers who are not sufficiently fluent in Estonian fear that they may lose their jobs. On the other hand, the reform can be seen as consonant with the growing tendency for non-Estonian parents to send their children to Estonian-medium schools. The so-called "forty-sixty" model was developed to allow space for the subjects that are



important for Russian identity, such as Russian language, literature, culture and history. Teaching Estonian to new immigrants and their offspring presents a further challenge for the educational system. A national program for the education of new immigrant children is currently at the draft stage. 37 Another measure designed to facilitate integration was the introduction of bilingual TV and radio programs during the early 1990s. These bring together Estonian and Russian speakers to discuss topics of general interest. Usually there are two bilingual moderators of TV programs who lead the discussion and interpret when necessary. In their parallel contribution to this volume, Metuzale-Kangere and Ozolins argue that victories by Latvia's sports teams might also have an important supporting role in promoting integration. Some of Estonia's promising Russianspeaking athletes serve as role models in this regard, while the country's victory in the 2001 Eurovision song contest also arguably had a positive effect: in spring 2002, a commentator on the Russian-language TV programme Pressklub reported that after the results of the contest had become clear, heavily Russian-accented shouts of "Elagu Eestimaa. t'' ("long live Estonia!") were heard in several localities. Conclusions A review of the current sociolinguistic situation in Estonia provides illuminating examples of language contacts and ongoing sociocultural changes. As a relatively new and developing field, Estonian sociolinguistics has not kept pace with the considerable recent developments in political and sociological research, and many important topics have yet to be tackled. Especially lacking is small-scale qualitative (microsociolinguistic) research: whilst we know something about the dynamics of attitudes and the prestige of various languages in society as a whole, there is little knowledge of people's everyday linguistic behavior. A study of the latter offers a wealth of insights that can be used to challenge or confirm the findings of sociologists. As is illustrated by the example of Russian and Estonian, the nature of contacts between two languages can vary enormously depending on the sociolinguistic setting. In this regard, the contact-induced language change observable amongst autochtonous Russians clearly differs from that which occurs within the current context of emerging Russian-Estonian bilingualism. The same distinction also applies in the case of EstonianFinnish language contacts, while Russian-Finnish language contacts in Tallinn are a new phenomenon that requires separate study. The distinction between autochtonous and non-autochtonous minorities is relevant not only in a legal and political sense but also in terms of


306

ANNAVERSCHIK

sociolinguistic behavior and self-identification. The discussion of Estonia's Jews in this article has shown that members of the same ethnic group may be divided on the basis of their origin and thus differ radically as far as their linguistic repertoire is concerned. So-called third ethnic groups are characterised by a relatively low language loyalty, with most members having already shifted to Russian. Little, however, is really known about the microsociolinguistic processes that take place amongst the speakers of those languages. Similarly, while various scholars in the social sciences attest to the sociocultural stratification and fragmentation of the Russian-speaking population, the relationship between these processes and contact-induced language change remains to be investigated. Preliminary empirical data, however, confirm that linguistic creativity, code-switching, a deliberate use of convergent forms, and compromise strategies are all gaining ground in Russian-Estonian communication. The extreme importance attached to issues of language policy is entirely understandable in light of the country's complex political and cultural history. Estonia differs considerably from the rest of east-central Europe in terms of its ethnodemographic and legal situation, a fact that explains the high degree of scholarly attention it has elicited from political scientists, sociologists and language policy specialists. Current debates still revolve around issues of linguistic and minority rights; yet, as highlighted here, such conventional Western approaches to the language situation run the risk of overlooking the completely different sociopolitical circumstances that are apparent in this case. In addition to state-sponsored programs and measures aimed at the integration of non-Estonians into Estonian society (language schools, language camps, bilingual and immersion education), certain sections of the Russian-speaking population already actively contribute to the integration of their children: Estonian-medium kindergartens are oversubscribed, and the number of Russian-speaking children in Estonianmedium schools is constantly growing. Estonia's achievements in economics, sports and popular culture provide an additional basis for positive self-identification. Notes

I. See Aavik 1924; Veski 1958. 2. Although this normative pressure lessened during the 1980s, centralised, strictly prescriptivecorpus planningis pursued in somecirclesto this day.


THE LANGUAGESITUATIONIN ESTONIA 307 3.

4. 5. 6.

7.

8.

9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

As far as the ethnic and linguistic composition of the population is concerned, three distinct regions gradually emerged: mixed Tallinn, the Russian dominated north-east, and the predominantly Estonian rest of the country. This distinction is still valid. Thomason and Kaufman 1988; Thomason 1997 and 2001; see also the general discussion in the special issue of Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1999, no 2. Heiter 1970; Ktilmoja 1999, 516-17. The situation of non-Old Believers, on the other hand, is more complicated. As Vihalemm and Masso (2002, 185) have it, the Russian community is "actually not a community but a relatively diffuse assemblage of people differentiated by their future aims, social capital, and cultural and political allegiances". See also Vetik 1994, 2002; Melvin 1995; Kirch and Kirch 1995; Kionka and Vetik 1996; Hallik 1997; Laitin 1998; Smith 1998; Kolsta 1999; Poppe and Hagendoorn 2001; Vihalemm 1997, 1999, 2002a; Jakobson, 2002; V. Pettai 2004. For an extensive bibliography see J~irve 1997; also Lauristin and Heidmets 2002. On "Estonian Russians" see: Vihalemm (1997); Kirch, Kirch and Tuisk (1997); Fi~,kina (2000); Bassel and Bojkov (2000). On the importance of deliberate changes as a mechanism of contact-induced change, see: Thomason 1997; 2001; and on the Russian-Estonian example in particular see Verschik 2002. Rare examples included the microsociolinguistic study on Finnish-Estonian codeswitching among Finnish students at the University of Tartu by Kataja (2001). An article by Kraut (2004) concentrates on errors made by learners of Finnish as L2 with Estonian as LI; however, the focus of the study lies in the fields of second language acquisition and contrastive analysis rather than that of contact linguistics. Cf. Franceschini (2002) on the quasi-Italian used by German-speaking salespersons with Italian-speaking clientele in Switzerland. Loog (t988) concentrates on registering and describing Finnish lexical items in Estonian youth slang. On the general situation of Ingrian Finns see Anepajo (1999), on lngrian FinnishEstonian language contacts see Savijarvi (1998). See Backus 1999; Muysken (2000) and references therein. See, for instance, Va~ri (1960) and Vilbaste (1960) on Estonian in the Caucasus, and Tuldava's (1965) review of Estonian in Sweden. In Estonia, Viikberg and Vaba (1984) conducted an investigation of Estonian in Siberia and the Far East (a review on Estonian in Russia is available in Viikberg t 998). Raimo Raag (1982) has made a major contribution to research on Estonian in Sweden, while a large-scale project on Estonian in Lund has been carried out by a group of scholars at the University of Tartu (Klaas 2002; Klaas and Laagus 1998). For an overall review of the research, see Hennoste 2003, 235-37. See, for instance, the discussion of bilingual or Russian-language TV shows in Verschik 2004c, and the analysis of interactions between close friends in Uprus 2004. For a detailed description and discussion see Raun 1985, 2001; M. Rannut 1994, 1999, 2004. Cited in Viikberg, 2000, 472-73. Viikberg considers the combination of criteria 2-4 to be the most important in this regard. These were the (Baltic) Germans, Swedes, Latvians, Russians, and Jews. Apart from these minorities and Estonians, the remaining forty-five ethnic groups totalled 7,300. See Viikberg (2000, 478). Finns, Roma and Tatars meet indigenousness criteria in addition to Jews, Latvians, Swedes, Germans and Russians. For some basic historical information on these minorities see Anepajo (1999), Berg (1999), Berg and Verschik (1999), Issakov (1999), Lutt, Vaba and Viikberg (1999), Saks and Rund,'ins (1999), Sieben (1999), Sarv (1999) and references therein.


308

ANNAVERSCHIK

20. In 2004 the Estonian Bureau of Lesser Used Languages (EstBLUL, Eesti Regionaal-ja V~ihemus keehe Lilt. Homepage , currently under construction) was founded. It represents the languages of Estonia's autochtonous ethnic communities (German, Finnish, Romani, Russian, Setu, Swedish, Tatar, V6ru, Yiddish). Interestingly, the Estonian census of 2000 did not recognise the V/Sru and Setu as distinct groups, or V6ru-Setu as a distinct language, whereas the last census in Russia (2001) did distinguish between Setu and Estonians. 21. An overview article on Estonian social dialectology by Pajusalu (2003c, 264-6) contains a bibliography of works detailing the historical and current dynamics of the traditional V6ru and Setu dialects and of the new standard language (see also the homepage of the Virtu Institute http://www.wi.ee). 22. The consequent existence of a citizen-non-citizen divide within this and other eligible communities has served as an impediment to their implementing the law on cultural autonomy, since formal membership of the public-legal corporations provided for by the law is open only to citizens. Most groups have therefore preferred to operate within the context of the Law on Non-commercial Organisations (Smith, 2002). For a discussion of the inherent difficulties of applying the "indigenous~non-indigenous" divide to contemporary Estonia, see Smith, 2001. 23. On Russian-speaking children in Estonian-medium schools see also Kalmus and Pavelson 2002; Asset, Pedastsaar, Trasberg and Vassilehenko 2002; Pavelson and Vihalemm 2002. 24. While there are certainly differences in the self-identification ofautochtonous and nonautochtonous Russians, these are arguably less pronounced than in the case of the Jews, since all Russians at least share the same language. 25. The new Law is available at . 26. Since 1995, the Director of the lnspectorate has been llmar Tomusk who has published on language legislation and policy in Estonia (Tomusk 2000; see also the website of the Language Inspectorate ). 27. This position is consistent with the Council of Europe Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities -- ratified by Estonia in 1996 -- which leaves it up to individual states to define the term "national minority". 28. The Estonian Federation of Associations of Ethnic Cultural Societies LiEira should also be mentioned in this connection, as should (at least for autochtonous minorities) the establishment of the Estonian Bureau for Lesser Used Languages (EstBLUL), mentioned earlier. 29. See Development Strategy of the Estonian Language: 47. DSEL is being implemented by several governmental, educational and research institutions (see M. Rannut 2004 for more details). It is supported through several state programs: The Estonian Language and National Memory (2004-2008), South Estonian Language and Culture (20002004), the Academic Foreign Teaching Program of the Estonian Language and Culture (2004-2008), the Compatriots' Program (2004-2008), Estonian Identity (2006-2009). 30. See . 31. For a more detailed account, see Laitin (2003), Lauristin and Heidmets (2002), Melvin (1995), and Vihalemm (1997; 1999; 2002a; 2002b). 32. For further details, see . The Integration Foundation publishes the bilingual newspaper Ruupor/Rupor (http://www.ruupor.net), which contains practical information for language learners and reports on the successful acquisition of Estonian. it also supports non-Estonian students in Estonian-medium schools, national cultural societies, and Sunday schools. 33. Learners are entitled to a total of three reimbursements, at beginners, intermediate and advanced level. See details at .


THE LANGUAGESITUATION1NESTONIA 309 34. See the homepage of the Language Immersion Centre (Keelekiimbluskeskus) at . 35. See Asser at ; also Vassiltgenko, Pedastsaar, Soil, Kala and Kera, 1998. 36. This requirement does not apply to private schools. 37. Available in Estonian from the homepage of the Ministry of Education and Research (http://www.hm.ee). Ulle Rannut, a specialist in issues of bilingual education, has put together a systematic collection of relevant information for new immigrants. See .

References 2000 Aasta rahva ja eluruumide loendus Eestis (2000 Population and Housing Census in Estonia) . Aavik, Johannes. Keeleuuenduse ?iiirmised v6imalused. Tartu: Istandik, 1924. Ahrens, Eduard. Grammatik der Ehstnischen Sprache Revalschen Dialektes. Reval: Laakmann, 1843. Anepajo, Terje. "Soomlasedl," in Jtiri Viikberg ed., Eesti rahvaste raamat. Tallinn: Eesti Entsiiklopeedea, 1999. Pp. 437-45. Ariste, Paul. Eesti-rootsi laens6nad eesti keeles. Tartu: K. Mattiesen, 1933. ---. Eesti keele hiiiildamine. Tartu: Eesti Kirjanduse Selts, 1939. Asser, Hiie. "Tendentsid ja tingimused muukeelse kooli arenguks Eestis." (Ministry of Education and Research) . ---, Pedastsaar, Tiia, Karmen Trasberg and Larissa Vassilchenko. "From Monolingual to Bilingual Russian Schools in Estonia 1993-2000: Problems and Perspectives," in Marju Lauristin and Mati Heidmets, eds., The Challenge o f the Russian Minority. Emerging Multicultural Democracy in Estonia. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2002. Pp. 237-53. Auer, Peter. "Introduction: 'Bilingual Conversation' Revisited," in Peter Auer, ed., Codeswitching in Conversation. London: Routledge, 1998. Pp. 1-24. ---."From Codeswitching via Language Mixing to Fused Lects: Toward a Dynamic Typology of Bilingual Speech." International Journal o f Bilingualism 3/4 (1999): 30932. Backus, Ad. "Mixed Native Languages: a Challenge to the Monolithic View of Language." Topics in Language Disorders 19.4 ( 1999): 11-22. Bassel, Naftoli and Viktor Bojkov, eds., Russkije v Estonii na poroge XXI veka: pro~loje, nastojag~eje, buduggeje. Tallinn: lngri, 2000. Berg, Eiki. "Peipsivenelased," in JiJri Viikberg, ed., Eesti rahvaste raamat. Tallinn: Eesti Entstiklopeedea, 1999. Pp. 361-66. Berg, Eiki and Anna Verschik,. "Juudid" in JiJri Viikberg, ed., Eesti rahvaste raamat. Tallinn: Eesti Entsiiklopeedia, 1999. Pp. 214-22. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 2 (1999). Burdakova, Olga. "Grammati~eskaja adaptacija 6stonskoj zaimstvovannoj leksiki v russkih govorah PriEud'ja." Russkajafilologija 8 (1997): 301-6. Burdakova, Natalja and Olga Burdakova, "O slovare pribaltijsko-finskih zaimstvovannij v russkih govorah estonskogo Pri~ud'ja," in Jiiri Viikberg ed., Inter dialectos nominaque. Piihendusteos Mari Mustale 11. Novembril 2000. Tallinn: Eesti Keele instituut, 2000. Pp. 18-38. Clyne, Michael. "Some of the Things Trilinguals Do." International Journal o f Bilingualism 1.2 (1997): 95-116.


310

ANNAVERSCHIK

Development Strategy of the Estonian Language 2004-2010. Tartu: Ministry of Education and Research -- Estonian Language Council, 2004. Diachkov, Mark. "Problems of Linguistic and Cultural Adaptation of 'Russophones' and Language Legislation." Language Policy in the Baltic States. Conference papers. Riga, December 17-19, 1992. Riga: Gar~ pupa, 1992. Pp. 192-99. Eesti keele arendamise strateegia 2004-2010. (Development Strategy of the Estonian Language) Tartu: Ministry of Education and Research -- Estonian Language Council, 2004. Eesti Regionaal-ja Viihemuskeelte Liit. (Estonian Bureau for Lesser Used Languages) . Eestimaa Rahvuste O h e n d u s . (Estonian Union of Nationalities) . Ehala, Martin. "Russian Influence and the Change in Progress in the Estonian Adpositional System." Linguistica Uralica 3 (1994): 177-93. ---. "Second Language Learners' Impact on the Structure of Estonian," in Kiira Allikmets, ed., Languages at Universities Today and Tomorrow. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2000. Pp. 20-32. Ehala, Martin and Katrin Niglas, "Eesti koolinoorte keelehoiakud," Keel ja Kirjandus, forthcoming. Erelt, Mati. "Preface," in Mati Erelt, ed., Estonian Language. Tallinn: Linguistica Uralica, 2003a. Pp. 7-8. ---. "Study of Estonian," in Mati Erelt, ed., Estonian Language. Tallinn: Linguistica Uralica, 2003b. Pp. 379-98. Erelt, Tiiu and Heli Laanekask. "Written Estonian," in Mati Erelt, ed., Estonian Language. Tallinn: Linguistica Uralica, 2003. Pp. 273-342. Extra, Guus. "Comparative Perspectives on Immigrant Minority Languages in Multicultural Europe." Paper held at Sociolinguistic Symposium 1.5, 1-4 April 2004, Newcastle upon Tyne. Fi~kina, Jelena. "Jest' li budu~eje u russkoj kul'tury v l~stonii?" in Naftoli Bassel and Viktor Bojkov, eds., Russkije v Estonii na poroge XX1 veka: progloje, nastojag6eje, budugdeje. Tallinn: lngri, 2000. Pp. 178-82. Franceschini, Rita. "Umgang mit Fremdheit: mixed style und quasi-ltalienisch bei Deutschschweizer Handlern im Gundeldingen (Basel)," in 1. Keim and W. SchiJtte, eds., Sociale Welten und kommunikative Stile. Festschrift J~r Werner Kallmeyer zum 60. Geburtstag. Tfibingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, 2002. Pp. 217-32. The Guidelines for the Application of Language Requirements in the Estonian SSR. Estonian SSR Council of Ministers, Decree no 10, 14 July 1989. Hallik, Klara. "Eestlaste ja venelaste poliititiste hoiakute ja geo-ajaloolise teadvuse polarisatsioon 1991. aastal," in Priit Jiirve, ed., Vene noored Eestis: sotsioloogiline mosaiik. Tartu-Tallinn: Avita, 1997. Pp. 11-17. Haridus-ja teadusministeerium (Ministry of Education and Research) . Hasselblatt, Cornelius. "Estonian between German and Russian: Facts and Fiction about Language Interference," in D. Gilbers et al, eds., Languages in Contact. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2000. Pp. 135-44. Heiter, Helle. "Osobennosti razvitija odnogo russkogo govora v inojazy~nom okru~enii na territorii I~SSR." Trudy Pribaltijskoj dialektologideskoj konferencii 1968. Tartu: University of Tartu, 1970. Pp. 217-26. Hennoste, Tiit. "Eesti keele arengud: totalitaariast poliiloogiasse." Keelja Kirjandus 42:2 (1999a): 88-96. ---. "Valter Tauli: Great Bystander." International Journal of the Sociology of Language 139 (1999b): 145-58.


THE LANGUAGE SITUATION IN ESTONIA 31 1

---. "Keelekasutuse uurimine," in Mati Erelt, ed., esti keele uurimise analfifis. Emakeele Seltsi dastaraamat 48, 2002. Tallinn: Eesti Teaduste Akadeemia Emakeele Selts, 2003. Pp. 217-62. Hennoste, Tilt, Leelo Keevallik, and Karl Pajusalu. "Introduction." International dournal of the Sociology of Language 139 (1999): 1- 16. Hennoste, Tilt and Triin Vihalemm. "V6tSrkeele suhtlusstrateegiad." Akadeemia 125.8 (1999): 1571-1607. Hermann, Karl August. Eesti keele Grammatik. Tartu: W. Just, 1884. ---. Eesti keele Lause-~petus. Eesti keele grammatika teine jagu. Jurjev: K. A. Hermann, 1896. Hinnenkamp, Volker. "Mixed Language Varieties of Migrant Adolescence and the Discourse of Hybridity." dournal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 24.12 (2003): 12-41. Hint, Marl. "Russian Influences in the Estonian Language." Congressus Septimus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum. IA Sessiones plenares. Debrecen, 1990. Pp. 87107. Issakov, Sergei. "Venelased," in Jtiri Viikberg, ed., Eesti rahvaste raamat. Tallinn: Eesti Entsfiklopeedea, 1999. Pp. 525-39. Jakobson, Valeria. "Civic, Political and Ethno-Cultural Collective Identities Constructed in the Russian Press of Estonia since 1947," in Marju Lauristin and Mati Heidmets, eds., The Challenge of the Russian Minority. Emerging Multicultural Democracy in Estonia. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2002. Pp. 175-84. JS.rve, Priit, ed. Vene noored Eestis: sotsioloogiline mosaiik. Tartu-Tallinn: Avita, 1997. Kalmus, Veronika and Marie Pavelson. "Schools in Estonia as Institutional Actors and as a Field of Socialisation," in Marju Lauristin and Mati Heidmets, eds., The Challenge of the Russian Minority. Emerging Multicultural Democracy in Estonia. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2002. Pp. 227-36. Karklins, Rasma. "Ethnopluralism: Panacea for East Central Europe?" Nationalities Papers 28.2 (2000): 219-41. Kataja, Annukka. "Koodivahetus Tartu soome tudengite keeles. Soome keel ja eesti keele m6jud." BA Thesis, Tartu: University of Tartu, Philosophy Faculty, Dept. of Estonian as a Foreign Language, 2001 (unpublished). Keelekiimbluskeskus. (Language Immersion Centre) . Keeleinspektsioon. (Language lnspectorate) . Keeleseadus. (Language Law) . Keevallik, Leelo. "Colloquial Estonian," in Mati Erelt, ed., Estonian Language. Tallinn: Estonian Academy Publishers, 2003. Pp. 343-78. Kionka, Riina and Raivo Vetik. "Estonia and the Estonians," in G. Smith, ed., The Nationalities Question in Post-Soviet States. London and New York: Longman, 1996. Pp. 129-46. Kirch, Aksel and Marika Kirch. "Ethnic Relations: Estonians and non-Estonians." Nationalities Papers 23.1 (1995): 43-59. Kirch, Aksel, Marika Kirch, and Tarmo Tuisk. "Vene noorte etnilise ja kultuurilise identiteedi muutused aastatel 1993-1996," in Priit J~irve, ed., Vene noored Eestis: sotsioloogiline mosaiik. Tartu-Tallinn: Avita, 1997. Pp. 47-68. Klaas, Birute. "Estonians and Estonian language in Southern Sweden and Lithuania," in Helle Metslang and Mart Rannut, eds., Languages in Development. MiJnchen: Lincom Europa, 2003. Pp. 37-48. Klaas, Birute and Aino Laagus. "Eesti keel LiSuna-Rootsis," in Liina Lindstr6m, ed., Vtiliseestlaste keelest (= Tartu Ulikooli eesti keele ~ppetooli toimetised 9). Tartu: Tartu University Press, 1998. Pp. 39-54.


312

ANNAVERSCHIK

Kolsto, P~I. "Territorializing Diasporas: The Case of the Russians in the Former Soviet Republics." Millenniuum - Journal of International Studies 28.3 (1999): 607-31. . Kostandi, Jelisaveta. "Kommunikativnaja struktura predlo~enija i teksta v russkom i 6stonskom jazykah." Emakeelja teised keeled H. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 1996. Pp. 165-73. ---. "Nekotoryje osobennosti sociokommunikativnoj obuslovlennosti porjadka slov (na mateiale russkoj pressy l~stonii)." Trudy po russkoj I slavjanskoj filologii. Lingvistika. Novaja serija II1. Jazyk diaspory." problemy i perspektivy, Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2000. Pp. 187-94. ---. "Keele vastastikuse m~Sjus0ntaktiline aspekt." Emakeelja teised keeled IV, Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2004. Pp. 76-83. Kraut, Kadi-Ann. "Emakeele m6jul tekkinud siintaksivigu eestlaste soome keele kasutuses." Emakeelja teised keeled IV. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2004. pp. 84-95. K~ilmoja, Irina. "Vene keel Eestis," in J~ri Viikberg, ed., Eesti rahvaste raamat. Tallinn: Eesti Ents~iklopeedea, 1999. Pp. 516-24. .... "Specifi~eskije ~erty jazyka russkoj diaspory l~stonii." Trudy po russkoj i slavjanskoj filologii. Lingvistika. Novaja serija IlL dazyk diaspory: problemy i perspektivy. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2000. Pp. 84-93. ---. "About the Language of the Russian Diaspora in Estonia." 1O0 aastat akadeemilist eesti keele 6pet Uppsala Olikoolis. Eesti keele ja keelepoliitika ettekanded. (100 Years of Academic Teaching of Estonian at the University of Uppsala. Reports on the Estonian Language and Language Policy) Uppsala and Tartu: Haridusministeerium, 2001. Pp. 98-104. Le Page, Robert and Andr6e Tabouret-Keller. Acts ofldentity: Creole-based Approaches to Language and Ethnicity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Laitin, David. "Language Planning in the Former Soviet Union: the Case of Estonia." International Journal of the Sociology of Language 118 (1996): 43-61. ---. Identity in Formation: the Russian-Speaking Populations in the Near Abroad. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1998. ---. "Three Models of Integration and the Estonian/Russian Reality." Journal of Baltic Studies 34.2 (2003): 197-223. Lauristin, Marju and Mati Heidmets, eds. The Challenge of the Russian Minority. Emerging Multicultural Democracy in Estonia. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2002. Leemets, Tiina. Inglise laenud ja m6jutused 20. sajandi t~pu eesti keele sSnavaras. MA Thesis, Tallinn: Eesti Keele Instituut, 2002. Liiv, Suliko. "The Role and the Use of English Loanwords in Estonian Press: Their Assimilation Process," in Helle Metslang and Mart Rannut, eds., Languages in Development. Miinchen: Lincom Europa, 2003. Pp. 167-72. Loog, Mai. "Soome m6jusid Tallinna noorte keelekasutuses." Keel ja Kirjandus 31.2 (1988): 83-89; 31:3 (1998): 144-48. Lutt, Roman, Lembit Vaba, and J~iri Viikberg. "Mustlased," in Jtiri Viikberg, eds., Eesti rahvaste raamat, Tallinn: Eesti Entsfiklopeedea, 1999. Pp. 334-39. Maurais, Jaque. "Regional Majority Languages, Language Planning and Linguistic Rights." International Journal of the Sociology of Language 127 (1997): 135-60. Melvin, Neff. Russians beyond Russia: the Politics of National Identity. London: The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1995. Mitte-eestlaste lntegratsiooni Sihtasutus (The Integration Foundation) . Muysken, Pieter. Bilingual Speech: a Typology of Code-mixing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.


THE LANGUAGESITUATIONIN ESTONIA 313 M/iOripeal, Evelin and Aap Neljas. "Kultuurautonoomia (1925-1940 ja alates 1993)," in J~iri Viikberg, ed., Eesti rahvaste raamat. Tallinn: Eesti Ents~iklopeedea, 1999. Pp. 270-76. MOrkhein, Veera. "Nabljudenija nad sistemoj sklonenija imen su~6estvitel'nyh v odnom iz russkih govorov l~stonskoj SSR." Trudy Pribaltijskoj dialektologideskoj konferencii 1968. Tartu: University of Tartu, 1970. Pp. 108-17. Oksaar, Els. "Spoken Estonian in Sweden and in the USA: An Analysis of Bilingual Behaviour," in E. S. Firchov et al, eds., Studies for Einar Haugen. The Hague: Mouton, 1972. Pp. 437-49. Ozolins, Uldis. "Between Russian and European Hegemony: Current Language Policy in the Baltic States." Current Issues in Language and Society 6. l (1999): 6-47. ---. "Post-imperialist Language Situations: the Baltic States." World Congress on Language Policies, Barcelona, 16-20 April 2002. . ---. "The Impact of European Accession on Language Policy in the Baltic States." Language Policy 2 (2003): 217-38. Pajusalu, Karl. "Eesti murrete uurimine," in Mati Erelt, ed., Eesti keele uurimise analiiiis. Emakeele Seltsi Aastaraamat 48, 2002. Tallinn: Eesti Teaduste Akadeemia Emakeele Selts, 2003a. Pp. 197-216. ---. "What Has Changed in Estonian Pronunciation: the Making of Estonian Accents," in Helle Metslang and Mart Rannut, eds., Languages in Development. Mfinchen: Lincom Europa, 2003c. Pp. 107-14. ---. "Estonian sociodialectology." Estonian Language. ed. Mati Erelt. Tallinn: Estonian Academy Publishers, 2003c. Pp. 262-72. Pajusalu, Karl, Velsker, Eva and Org, Ervin. "On recent changes in South Estonian: dynamics in the formation of the inessive." International Journal of the Sociology of Language 139 (1999): 87-103. Pavelson, Marje and Vihalemm, Triin. "The Russian Child in the Estonian Language School," in Marju Lauristin and Mati Heidmets, eds., The Challenge of the Russian Minority. Emerging Multieultural Democracy in Estonia. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2002. Pp. 265-76. Pettai, Iris. "Mitte-eestlaste identiteet n6rgeneb." . Pettai, Vello. "Framing the Past as Future: The Power of Legal Restorationalism in Estonia." PhD Thesis, Columbia University, 2004. Ponarin, Eduard. "The Prospects of Assimilation of the Russophone Populations in Estonia and Ukraine: a Reaction to David Laitins's Research." Europe-Asia Studies 52.8 (2000): 1535-1541. Poppe, Edwin and Louk Hagendoom. "Types of Identification among Russians in the 'Near Abroad'." Europe-Asia Studies 53.1 (2001 ): 57-71. Raag, Raimo. Lexical Characteristics in Swedish Estonian (= Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Uralica et Altaica Upsaliensia 13). Uppsala: Uppsala University, 1982. ---. "One Plus One Equals One: the Forging of Standard Estonian." International Journal of the Sociology of Language 139 (I 999): 17-38. Raag, Virve. The Effects of Planned Change on Estonian Morphology (=Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Uralica Upsaliensia 29). Uppsala: Uppsala University, 1998. Rannut, Mart. "Beyond Linguistic Policy: the Soviet Union versus Estonia," in Robert Phillipson, Tove Skutnabb-Kangas and Mart Rannut, eds., Linguistic Human Rights. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1994. Pp. 179-208. ---. "Estonia," in H. Goebl et al, eds., Kontaktlinguistik. Contact Linguistics. Linguistique de contact. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgeni~ssischer Forsehung. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1997. Pp. 1900-1907.


314

ANNAVERSCHIK

---. "Some Remarks on Language Policy," in A.-F. Christidies, ed., "Strong" and "Weak" Languages in the European Union. Aspects o f Linguistic Hegemonism. Thessaloniki: Centre for the Greek Language. 1999: I. Pp. 139-44. ---. "Language Policy in Estonia." Noves SL. Revista de Sociolinguistica. Spring-Summer 2004:. . Rannut, Ulle. "Keelekeskkonna m6ju muukeelsete 6pilaste integratsioonile." Keel ja Kirjandus 45.5 (2002): 342-58. ---. Muukeelsete 6pilaste intergreerimine eesti koolis. Tallinn: Tallinn Pedagogical University Press, 2003. Raud, Rein. "The Conditions for a Multicultural Estonia," in J.-J. Subrenat, ed., Estonia. ldentity and Independence. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2004. Pp. 257-68. Raun, Toivo. "Language Development and Policy in Estonia," in lsabelle T. Kreindler, ed., Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Soviet National Languages: Their Past, Present and Future. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1985. Pp. 13-35. ---. Estonia and Estonians. 2nd Ed. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Hoover Institution Press, 200 I. Ruupor/ Rupor . R~i~.bis, Andriela. "Telefonivestluste sissejuhatus." Keelja Kirjandus 43.6 (2000): 209-24. Saareste, Andrus. Eesti murdeatlas. Atlas des parlers estonien. 1. vihik. Tartu: Eesti Kirjanduse Selts, 1938. ---. Eesti murdeatlas. Atlas des parlers estonien. 2. vihik. Tartu: Tartu Teaduslik Kirjastus, 1941. Saks, Ita and Rund~ns, Kazimirs. "L~itlased," in Jiiri Viikberg, ed., Eesti rahvaste raamat. Tallinn: Eesti Entsiiklopeedea, 1999. Pp. 290-300. Sarv, Ain. "Eestirootslased," in Jiiri Viikberg, ed., Eesti rahvaste raamat. Tallinn: Eesti EntsiJklopeedea, 1999. Pp. 147-56. Savij~rvi, Ilkka. "Cognate Languages in Contact. Ingria -- where Four Baltic-Finnic Languages Meet," in Jussi Niemi, Terence Odlin and Janne Heikkinen eds., Language Contact, Variation and Change. Studies in Languages 32. Joensuu: University of Joensuu, 1998. Pp. 269-86. Sieben, Viktor. "Sakslased," in Eesti rahvaste raamat, ed. JiJri Viikberg. Tallinn: Eesti Entsfiklopeedea, 1999. Pp. 429-33. Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. "Linguistic Human Rights in Education." Language Policy in the Baltic States. Conference papers. Riga, December 17-19, 1992. Riga: Gar~ pupa, 1992. 173-91. Smith, David J. "Russia, Estonia and the Search for a Stable Ethno-Politics." Journal o f Baltic Studies 29.1 ( 1998): 3-18. ---. Cultural Autonomy in Estonia. A Relevant Paradigm for the Post-Soviet Era? Working Paper 19/01 of the ESRC "One Europe or Several?" Programme. University of Sussex: ESRC, 2001. ---. "Narva Region within the Estonian Republic: from Autonomism to Accommodation?" Regional and Federal Studies 12:2 (2002): 89-110. ---. "Minority Rights, Multiculturalism and EU Enlargement. The Case of Estonia." Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe I (2003) . Spolsky, Bernard. Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. Tauli, Valter. Oigekeelsuse ja keelekorralduse p6him6tted ja meetodid. Tartu: Akadeemilise Kooperatiivi Kirjastus, 1938. ---. Introduction to a Theory o f Language Planning. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Studia Philologiae Scandinavicae Upsaliensia 6. Uppsala: University of Uppsala, 1968. Tomusk, Ilmar. Eesti keelepoliitika p6him6tted ja diinaamika eurointegratsiooni ning rahvusvaheliste inim6iguste kontekstis. Tallinn: Tallinna Tehnikaiilikool, 2002.



Thomason, Sarah G. "On Mechanisms of Interference," in Stig Eliasson and Ernest H~.kon Jahr eds., Language and its Ecology. Essays in Memory of Einar Haugen. Berlin: Mouton de GruNter, 1997. Pp. 181-207. ---. Language Contact." an Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2001. Thomason, Sarah G. and Terence Kaufman. Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1988. Tuldava, Juhan. "VS~rm~jud rootsi eestlaste keeles." Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat 11 (1965): 94-104. V~ari, Eduard. "Kaukaasia eestlaste keelest." Keelja Kirjandus 3.7 (1960), 425-29. Vassilt~enko, Larissa, Tiia Pedastsaar, Maie Soil, Ulve Kala, and Silvia Kera. "Venekeelse kooli erinevate mudelitega seotud ootused ja kartused haridussubjektide seas," in Marju Lauristin et al., eds., Mitmekultuuriline Eesti: viiljakutse haridusele. Tartu: Tartu 01ikooli Kirjastus, 1998. Pp. 149-86. Verschik, Anna. "Yiddish in Estonia: Past and Present." Journal of Baltic Studies 30.2 ( 1999): I 17- 28. ---. "Estonian Jews: Integration and Language Choice," in E. VEbers, ed., lntegracija un etnopolitica. Riga: Latvian University, Philosophy and Sociology Institute, 2000. Pp. 215-29. ---. "Russian-Estonian Contacts and Mechanisms of Interference." Trames 6 (2002): 24565. ---. "On contemporary Russian-Estonian Language Contacts." Paper held at Sociolinguistic Symposium 15, 1-4 April 2004, Newcastle upon Tyne, 2004a. ---. "Estonian Compound Nouns and their Equivalents in the Local Variety of Russian." Scando-Slavica 50 (2004b): 93-109. ---. "Aspects of Russian-Estonian Code-switching: Research Perspectives." International Journal of Bilingualism 8.4 (2004c): 427-48. ---. "Research into Multilingualism in Estonia." G. Hogan-Brun, guest ed., special issue of Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 2005, in press. Veski, Johannes Voldemar. Johannes Voldemar Veski keelelisi t6id. Tallinn: Eesti Riiklik Kirjastus, 1958. Vetik, Raivo. "Russians in Estonia: New Development Trends," in Marika Kirch and David Laitin, eds., Changing Identities in Estonia: Sociological Facts and Commentaries. Tallinn: Akadeemia Tr~ikk, 1994. Pp. 72-79. ---. "Identity Development and Political Adjustment in Estonia: Research Note." World Affairs 157.3 (1995): 147-48. ---. "Multicultural Democracy as a New Model of National Integration in Estonia," in Marju Lauristin and Mati Heidmets, eds., The Challenge of the Russian Minority. Emerging Multicultural Democracy in Estonia. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2002. Pp. 55-62. Vihalemm, Triin. "Vene elanikkonna eesti keele oskus, kasutamine ja hoiakud selle omandamise suhtes 1990-1995," in Priit J~rve, ed., Vene noored Eestis: sotsioloogiline mosaiik. Tartu - Tallinn: Avita, 1997. Pp. 245-53. ---. "Estonian Language Competence, Performance and Beliefs on Acquisition among the Russian-Speaking Inhabitants of Estonia 1989-1999." International Journal of the Sociology of Language 139 (I 999): 69-85. ---. "Theoretical Perspectives on the Formation of New Civic Identity in Estonia," in Marju Lauristin and Mati Heidmets, eds., The Challenge of the Russian Minority. Emerging Multicultural Democracy in Estonia. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2002a. Pp. 165-73. ---. "Usage of Language as a Source of Societal Trust," in Marju Lauristin and Mati Heidmets, eds., The Challenge of the Russian Minority. Emerging Multicultural Democracy in Estonia. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2002b. Pp. 199-217. ---. "Bridge and Border Role of Language -- Transformation of Identity-Construction Patterns in Estonia." (manuscript)


316

ANNAVERSCHIK

Vihalemm, Triin and Anu Masso. "Patterns of Self-Identification among the Younger Generation of Estonian Russians," in Marju Lauristin and Mati Heidmets. The Challenge of the Russian Minority. Emerging Multicultural Democracy in Estonia. Tartu: Tartu University Press, 2002. Pp. 185-98. Viikberg, Jiiri. "Venemaa eestlaste keele uurimisest," in Liina Lindstr6m, ed., Viiliseestlaste keelest (= Tartu Olikooli eesti keele 6ppetooli toimetised 9). Tartu: Tartu University Press, 1998. Pp. 36-38. ---. "Estonian National Minorities: Past and Present," in E. Vebers, ed., lntegracija un etnopolitica. Riga: Latvian University, Philosophy and Sociology Institute, 2000. Pp. 470-83. Viikberg, J~iri and Lembit Vaba. "Siberi p6hjaeestlasi k6netamas." Keelja Kirjandus 27.3 (1984): 145-56; 27.4 (1984): 210-23. Vilbaste, Gustav. "Kaukaasia eestlaste keelest ja rahvaluulest." Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat 4 ( 1960): 121-31. Vdru lnstitituut (V6ru Institute) . l]prus, Tene. "Eestlaste keeleline kohanemine eesti-vene segagruppide k6neanaliifasi p6hjal." BA thesis, Tallinn: Tallinn Pedagogical University, Department of Estonian as a Foreign Language, 2004.